April 2, 2012

"... who are threatened by the voters actually being in charge of where their tax dollars are being spent."

That's the way Governor Walker speaks in email soliciting campaign contributions. From a "Dear Conservative" email I received this morning, quoted in full after the jump. Boldface in the original, link to contribution site deleted (because I'm printing this not to help the campaign but to discuss the ideas presented):

Dear Conservative,

As the duly elected Governor of Wisconsin I have been steadfast in my beliefs that limited government and fiscal responsibility should be the cornerstone of putting my state back on the road to prosperity.

I am facing a recall by the big-government public employee unions and their minions who are threatened by the voters actually being in charge of where their tax dollars are being spent.

In November of 2010, the majority of Wisconsin voters resoundingly said enough-is-enough to the status quo and put me in charge of a state that had been beholden to big government special interests with a tax-and-spend mentality that created a $3.6 billion deficit.

In less than a year we were able to eliminate this deficit and provide the freedom of choice for public employees. Our reforms are allowing them to decide if they would like to spend more than a thousand dollars a year in union dues or keep their money. We put a stop to the unions’ railroading of the taxpayers' hard-earned dollars.

What we need now is your help in telling the unions we do not want another tax-and-spend liberal at the reins of power in Wisconsin. You can do this by contributing $20, $50, $100, or whatever you can afford by clicking here.

I have been a man of my word to the voters of this state and have always led by putting the interests of Wisconsin taxpayers first.

Since taking office, I have eliminated a bureaucratic and bloated budget mess left by the previous administration without raising taxes or laying off state workers. Thousands of Wisconsinites are back on the job, and statewide property taxes have decreased for the first time in years. Stand with me today with a generous contribution of $20, $50, $100, or whatever you can afford.

The people of Wisconsin deserve to see the bold and courageous choices I have made come to fruition. It is time to stop these out-of-state special interests in their tracks and let them know that our conservative values will not be taken lightly.

With your help, I will be the first Governor of Wisconsin elected twice in my first term.

"I have been a man of my word to the voters of this state and have always led by putting the interests of Wisconsin taxpayers first."

Unions are really just private job-protection clubs, funded by others. Pretty good setup, you have to admit. And now that 'taxpayers' (non-members) are wise to the fix, unions strain to survive via public displays of protest (tantrums).

I have no problem with unions, but they need to be self-funding and willing to compete on an even playing field with the private sector. That's fair. Asking non-members (taxpayers) to subsidize their job insurance is apparently beyond their understanding. The constructs they present supporting their case are strained and unsustainable.

I havent kept up with Wisconsin politics. Several questions: does there have to be a candidate from other parties on the ballot? Or can Gov W be recalled without an opposition candidate. And I understand the LTGOV is also being recalled, so if both are recalled, and no opposition candidate on the ballot, what happens? Thanks in advance for any enlightenment.

"Except, of course, the freedom to choose to be represented by a union."

-- Unions have been outlawed over there? I thought that now, people were allowed to choose not to have their wages garnished against their will by unions. (And, was this the law that secured the right to a secret ballot for union elections, or is that a different one?)

Walker didn't campaign on a plan to strip the public unions of their collective bargaining rights, did he? Did he even mention it before the election? If not, why aren't union supporters focusing on that and framing it as a deception?

Old dead eyes knows the language the will gather more money form his supporters in Texas, but not Wisconsin as many of those minions are our neighbors who patrol our streets and put out our fires, and teach in one of the highest ranked public school systems in the country.

"Walker didn't campaign on a plan to strip the public unions of their collective bargaining rights, did he? Did he even mention it before the election? If not, why aren't union supporters focusing on that and framing it as a deception?"

-- Obama didn't campaign on keeping Gitmo open and bombing Libya.

It's almost like being a chief executive involves a lot of issues. Also, yes. They have been framing it as a deception. It is the whole foundation of their argument, and one that I'm surprised someone passingly familiar with the issue was unaware of.

Tomorrow is primary day for those who live in Wisconsin. Don't forget to vet your local candidate with the tool provided by iVerifyTheRecall.com. This is especially true if voting for school board members.

Tomorrow is primary day for those who live in Wisconsin. Don't forget to vet your local candidate with the tool provided by iVerifyTheRecall.com. This is especially true if voting for school board members

Once again it should be noted, state government employess are PAID MUCH LESS THAN PRIVATE EMPLOYEES....the state can and used to offer an offset of this with a good health insurance benefit and participation in state retirement fund. This is done because IT IS CHEAPER for the state than paying straight up equal wages.

State employees will never "compete on a level playing field" because states will never pay as much as the private sector. They will always get paid less in straight up wages...if in the future, state employees get paid less and do not get to participate in health and retirement benefits, good luck getting anyone would a damn to work for the state....but that's probably the plan, isn't it...

"Walker didn't campaign on a plan to strip the public unions of their collective bargaining rights, did he? Did he even mention it before the election? If not, why aren't union supporters focusing on that and framing it as a deception?"

The left is trying to say that, but Walker supporters have found links showing that the same unionists said in the fall of 2010 that they need to oppose Walker because he was going to do this.

Besides, that is a weak reson for a recall. Do we impeach Obama because he never said he was going to send missles into Pakistan to kill private citizens? Did he ever say he was going to throw away %515,000,000 on Solyndra? Did he say he was going to declare war on the Catholic church and other religious institutions?

If I accept your narrative, my only response is this; no one is forced to work a state job. Go work in the private sector, if you are able to compete for one of those better-paying jobs.

That the public unions feel they have a 'right' to bargain collectively against the very people that pay them is telling.

It illustrates a line of demarcation the unions are willing to draw. So important, in fact, they are willing to march against their fellow neighbors, insisting their so-called 'rights' trump everyone else's.

Well, the 'rights' are not rights, they are conditions, subject to change. That means bennies/perks can be scaled back as well as supplemented depending on conditions. And as such, the Governor, effectively C.O.O. of the state, is acting in the interests of all citizens to reduce cost (public unions are not self-funding). Thats his job, regardless of his campaign promises. Get over it.

One thing gov't workers get that private sector employees don't is job security. How many real world workers out there are worried about losing their houses right now do to job loss? Something you wouldn't see with Madison public employees.

The real objection is the Unions skimming paychecks to give money to Democrats. The "lower pay" meme is not necessarily true these days.

And if the retirement structure is unaffordable and obaianed with phony projections of future tax receipts, then it is the duty of Government to bring it in line with reality. That doesn't mean "bailout"; it means reducing expenditures until you are financially sound.

Public Employees are not exempt from economic reality, just because their union purchased some Democrats in an election.

They are also not exempt from the will of the voters, but they sure seem to think that they are.

It is time we put our employees in their place and reminded them who they work for.

"garage mahal said...Gawd, these guys think their supporters are MORONS."

then writes this:

"garage mahal said...Tomorrow is primary day for those who live in Wisconsin. Don't forget to vet your local candidate with the tool provided by iVerifyTheRecall.com. This is especially true if voting for school board members

Joe McCarthy always did have a following in Wisconsin."

I would ask you to explain, but the explanation would just be more idiotic.

Thevrhetoric: "minions." "threatened." And who's in charge? Who rammed through legislation that was hugely unpopular?

"...by the voters...." Who received almost as many recall signatures as he did total votes in the general election?

*whine* send me some money some money so I don't have to work for a living, because I don't know what I'd do...." By his own records Walker spent one hour on the people's business in January, the latest month for which I have statistics.

"They're not votes, and they didn't verify anything. The databases exists solely to harass and intimidate people who signed a petition."

-- This would have a much stronger leg to stand on if, just a little while ago, we didn't see exactly the sort of harassment and intimidation that was considered acceptable against people who didn't on Proposition 8.

The chance to ask for people to use these tools the proper way was then; politics is not Roshambo, where you get to kick people and then call the game over in the same breath.

Choosing how you will vote, by basing it on people's public records, is also significantly different from picketing their homes and businesses. Once that starts happening, then it'll be remotely close to how signatures were misused in the past.

No. Unions try to do what anyone dealing in a commodity desires to do. Unions always try to corner the market in labor in their particular field. All unions want to monopolize labor. They are no different than corporations in that respect. They fail when competition is available.

STATE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES ARE PAID MUCH LESS THAN PRIVATE EMPLOYEES..

The databases exists solely to harass and intimidate people who signed a petition.

I agree. As someone who signs all sorts of petitions related to elections and ballots (I may or may not have signed the Recall Petition), I find the suggestion that someone signing a recall has somehow automatically become a partisan a pretty ridiculous notion.

Corporations don't necessarily fail when competition is available. In fact, in many cases, they are driven to compete, driving prices down while quality and features go up. The tablet and smartphone market is a prime example.

Unions, on the other hand, are like a company that seeks to assure that the am/fm/cassette Walkman never leaves the store shelf, no matter how outdated and poorly performing it has become.

I know GED toting potheads who are stoned all day who make more coherent arguments and have a better grasp of nuance and are more willing to consider an opposing opinion than the lefties who post on this board.

"No Matthew, uphold Citizens United, by all means. It just helped Unions in the same way it's helping Corporations."

-- Unions already were able to leverage money, etc., for political purposes more readily than corporations. So, it did more to level the playing field by pulling up corporations than by doing any harm to unions.

Recall petitions are public documents. There is nothing wrong with voters looking at these public statements when choosing their candidates. They provide good insight into whether an individual shares your views on taxes and spending.

Comparing the examination of a candidate's public statements to intimidation is moronic.

Walker didn't campaign on a plan to strip the public unions of their collective bargaining rights, did he? Did he even mention it before the election? If not, why aren't union supporters focusing on that and framing it as a deception?

Hey, didn't Obama run OPPOSING an individual mandate and ALSO opposing out-of-control deficits?

I think you were about to get to that when your computer cruelly submitted the post before you were done.

Old dead eyes knows the language the will gather more money form his supporters in Texas, but not Wisconsin as many of those minions are our neighbors who patrol our streets and put out our fires, and teach in one of the highest ranked public school systems in the country.

And, as has also been shown, the racial make-up of WI is why their scores are so high. Shown in detail to be the case.

TX actually tends to teach its students better than WI does.

Once again it should be noted, state government employess are PAID MUCH LESS THAN PRIVATE EMPLOYEES

The database exists solely to harass and intimidate people who signed a petition.

Perhaps, garage, you'd care to point out the posts where you similarly slammed the various "know your neighbor" petitions the pro-gay marriage bigots used in Massachusetts and California to identify, harass and intimidate Enemies of the People?

Christ, sometimes I swear the sharpest thing you should be allowed to handle is a rubber ball.

Perhaps, garage, you'd care to point out the posts where you similarly slammed the various "know your neighbor" petitions the pro-gay marriage bigots used in Massachusetts and California to identify, harass and intimidate Enemies of the People?.

Are you saying you support our current President and you are therefore holding his behavior up as something one should emulate? Or are you trying to claim that two wrongs make a right?

Neither. But when you cite only one side as behavior as bad actors in a given situation and that other side just happens to be one you generally disagree with, it speaks to a certain shade of hypocrisy.

In other words, there's enough shit, penguin or otherwise, to go around.

"Are you saying you support our current President and you are therefore holding his behavior up as something one should emulate? Or are you trying to claim that two wrongs make a right?

Please clarify...thanks"

-- I'm saying that, for the most part, what you're actually decrying is the effective use of language by someone you disagree with. You're playing politics, not trying to actually get people to tone down their rhetoric.

Which is apparent in the double standard that is held by how some people can get away with claiming women are just men with skirts, while others are held to the fire over every remark.

The preening and posturing is transparent; the lack of consistency in the cries for civility leaves it empty and hollow.

Neither. Just that your squawking about one and not the other is a typical example of your mendacity. Of course, if you did protest that the KYN websites and lists were bad, then I'll freely withrdaw the claim of hackery on your part.

Ah, the tried and true Jay tactic of "Where were you when _______ happened????"

Please, GM. There's so much bullshit of that vein leveled at conservatives hereabouts, usually of the type citing x-behavior by the Bush administration in defense of the current, that I'm surprised you brought it up. AlphaLiberal and Love/Jeremy are repeat offenders.

This, of course, also raises your own personal bar, doesn't it? You'll never cop to this angle of argument in the future?

I'm sure you're right. But I'm specifically talking about candidates running for political office. These are the people that have a potential impact on how taxes are collected and spent in my community. I don't care about the others.

If you're running for office you should be willing to stand by own public statements. There is no need to worry about this information unless you are pretending to be something you're not.

"garage mahal said...Perhaps, garage, you'd care to point out the posts where you similarly slammed the various "know your neighbor" petitions the pro-gay marriage bigots used in Massachusetts and California to identify, harass and intimidate Enemies of the People?.

So, which example is bad? One? Both?"

The obvious distinction is that there is a difference between deciding who to vote for and going out and harassing someone because they signed a petition you don't like. That is to say, you might well vote for a signer of the recall Walker petition over someone who didn't, if you knew nothing about either candidate.

There's so much bullshit of that vein leveled at conservatives hereabouts, usually of the type citing x-behavior by the Bush administration in defense of the current, that I'm surprised you brought it up

Outrage is exhausting. I don't go looking for things in other states to outrage me (unless, of course, they are truly outrageous :) ) My not commenting on something happening in another state -- or even in Wisconsin -- does not mean that I find it unworthy of censure or disapproval. I just think people who are always outraged -- on either side of the political spectrum -- are boring.

And I do think that most people share a sense of That ain't right when they read about something that others are finding outrageous and commenting on* -- but sometimes there's not much to add to the discussion.

*To be clear: That ain't right applies to the outrageous event, not the commenting on it :)

I guess I am still confused on the recall process in WI. The citizens vote on the question should Mr Walker be recalled--presumably thats a yes or not vote. If Mr Walker is recalled, then a second election is held to elect a new governor? In the event of Mr Walker's recall, is the Lt Governor then the acting governor? but I do understand she is also being recalled. So, if Gov W is recalled, but the Lt Gov is not, does she then become the governor? And no further elections are necessary? and if both Gov and Lt Gov are recalled, then the electoral process starts anew with all parties nomination candidates for a general election?

Freder Frederson said...In less than a year we were able to eliminate this deficit and provide the freedom of choice for public employees.

Except, of course, the freedom to choose to be represented by a union.

4/2/12 8:59 AM

How so? Not being required to join a union is the same as losing the right to be represented by a union if you chose to be a a member? You are starting to sound as nutty as machine. By the way machine, public employees are not drafted or indentured servants. They can quit and find employment in the private sector. If you made a wrong career choice that is your problem, not other people's problem.

You know, garage, I'd give you the benefit of the doubt concerning KYN in Massachusetts.

But that you, an indefatigable commenter on this blog, can post with an internet straight face that you have "no idea" what I refer to in regards to the Prop 8 hatefest in California - a political proposition extensively covered by Althouse - bespeaks either mental incapacity so severe it would behoove you to find someone to remind you to breathe on a minute-by-minute basis, a willful ignorance approaching Obama-level blankness or a near-superhuman capacity to lie which should make you an automatic shoo-in for the post of press secretary in the next Democrat administration.

"Roger J. said...I guess I am still confused on the recall process in WI. The citizens vote on the question should Mr Walker be recalled--presumably thats a yes or not vote. If Mr Walker is recalled, then a second election is held to elect a new governor? In the event of Mr Walker's recall, is the Lt Governor then the acting governor? but I do understand she is also being recalled. So, if Gov W is recalled, but the Lt Gov is not, does she then become the governor? And no further elections are necessary? and if both Gov and Lt Gov are recalled, then the electoral process starts anew with all parties nomination candidates for a general election?

Can any of you folks in Wisconsin explain this to me?"

There is no vote for recall, petitioners must get 25% of the total votes cast in the election that produced the officer holder they want recalled. They have 60 days. If they do it, then there is a special election. Allie gets it right from there.

Exactly which comment from the "other" side in the original post is it that you think I should have also commented on? 'cause I honestly don't see what you're talking about.

And in regards to the Nat'l Guard: Gov. Walker did publicly state that he was in communication with the National Guard and that he had told 'em that they may be mobilized due to reactions to the Budget Repair Bill becoming law.

At the time he made that statement he didn't give a reason why he thought the NG would be needed. It was a few days later that his staff said that the troops would have been used if the prison guards decided to strike/walkout/quit.

Roger, the way I understood how recalls happen in WI is an entity files papers with the GAB signifying that they are going to start a recall attempt. Then signatures are collected on the petions to recall, which must be collected in a certain time frame. If there are enough signatures, based on a percentage of the votes the person being recalled got, are collected. It then goes to back to the GAB to certify, once the GAB certifies that the signatures are legit, a recall election is then scheduled.

Dear Allie--between you and the other commenters, I think I have it. yours, Leslyns, curious, and penguin's comments have clarified it for me. much appreciated. really. It sounds like Wisconsin politics will be up in the air for a while--are there any democrats who will run? have heard of a few names bandied about, but have any dems declared?

The Wisconsin political field is very much in play. Walker is running for reelection, as is Lieutenant Governor Rebeccas Kleefisch. Democrat challengers have announced in both contests, with former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk gaining substantial labor backing in her run for the party's gubernatorial nod. Secretary of State Doug La Follette, Wisconsin's longest-serving statewide official is also running, as is state Senator Kathleen Vinehout, a rural populist who was one of the 14 Democratic senators who left the state Capitol in order to block action on Walker's anti-labor proposals. And, on Friday afternoon, following the certification of the petitions, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, the party's 2010 gubernatorial nominee, entered the Democratic race.

My two cents:- there's no equivalency at all. The "incendiary device" hurt no one. Let me know when the number of dead murder doctors and their little Eichmanns approaches even one hour's worth of Kermit Gosnell's butchery.

- The faster Planned Murderhood and its Moloch-worshpping supporters are driven out of business, the better.

sorry for consecutive posts, but do not the apparent plethora of dem candidates diminish their chances? Seems to me Mr Walker should be quite happy to see as many dems in the race when he is a stand alone.

And in regards to the Nat'l Guard: Gov. Walker did publicly state that he was in communication with the National Guard and that he had told 'em that they may be mobilized due to reactions to the Budget Repair Bill becoming law."

Again, bullshit. He announced his budget in a press conference on 2/11. It was known that the National Guard usage was in plan for walkouts specifically to man prisons. The "few days later" was the administration reiterating that it was to man prisons after the myriad of lefty lies, which you and Allie prove will never end.

All you have to do is google "walker national Guard" to see press coverage that it was specific to prisons.

"It says a lot about our political landscape when a sitting Governor can refer to the public workers as "minions"."

It says a lot about our political landscape when public school teachers can refer to the Governor of their state as "Hitler".

I beleive that both of those references/comparasions are wrong, and they cheapen the discussion by distracting from the actual issues involved.

Are you saying they are both good examples of how one should discuss political issues? Or is one good and the other bad? Please clarify...thanks.

(I also think there is some difference between a homemade sign carried by a random person and an official fundraising letter from a sitting Governor, but I totally understand how that nuance may be lost on some...)

So planting a bomb at a PP clinic is worse than carrying a Walker=Hitler sign? Wow.

I think you meant to say no worse than, slick.

But I do note how convenient it is that one of your temples is "attacked" - presumably by a womyn-hating, knuckledragging teabagger - just "two days before Wisconsin goes to the polls in the Republican presidential primary", as your hack site points out.

Not that the left would ever indulge in false-flag operations. No siree, not you guys. Pure as the driven snow, that's you.

You said that Walker didn't make it known immediately that the use of the NG was for staffing prisons.

His comments from the press conference on 2/11:

"In state government, we have had, before I’ve taken office, plans for contingencies no matter what the circumstances. We have updated those. I got a full briefing from all the major, level-one state agencies as well as the National Guard yesterday. We are fully prepared and equipped to handle whatever may occur. So we have every confidence we can move forward on that."

"But again, you plan for the worst, you expect the best. And I expect from the good men and women who work for state and local government that they’re going to continue to do the good, professional job they do each and every day."

When asked about the National Guard specifically, he said:

"They’re not called up at this point. We obviously have a whole series of circumstances that would lead to that. I’m not anticipating that, I’m not expecting that, but I want to make everyone certain in this state that I’m fully prepared for whatever may happen."

The word "prisons" doesn't even seem to have been uttered by the Governor during that press conference. Rather it was later that day, at a different location, when one of his staffers told a lone reporter that using the troops as prison guards was one example of what they could be mobilized for. The following week a different staffer repeated that same example in a press conference with many reporters, and also said they could possibly be used in hospitals in case nurses walked off the job.

Please note, I ain't claiming that Walker said he was gonna sic the troops on protesters or anything like that, but rather I am calling into question your repeated claim that it is "100% pure bullshit" that Walker did say that was prepared to mobilize the National Guard.

Not only did he flat-out mention the NG, but he also didn't initially say what he expected them to be used for...just that he wanted them ready for "whatever may happen".

Speaking of, weren't you one of the folks who were upset that the Guard wasn't used to drag the protesters out of the Capitol? I know quite a few commentators was calling for exactly that, so I might be confusing you with someone else.

More inflammatory bullshit. By the way, Governor Doyle did the exact same thing in 2003 when the prison guard contract was expired. You know what was said then by those on the left and right? Not a fucking thing. You are a moron.

As far as Penguins moronic rebuttal, other than proving that Walker did not "threaten", again it was documented in the press that Walker referred to prisons...ON THE SAME DAY.

Dave Blaska in the Isthmus "The governor has contingency plans to take over the prisons, undoubtedly using the National Guard. Plans are also in place to staff intensive care facilities, should those employees walk out."

AP: Walker said Friday that he hasn't called the Guard into action, but he has briefed them and other state agencies in preparation of any problems that could result in a disruption of state services, like staffing at prisons.

MSJ: When he spoke later that day to Journal Sentinel reporters and editors, Walker used the example of the National Guard helping run state prisons in the event of a strike by corrections workers.

So it wasn't a few days later like you said asshole, it was the same fucking day, like I said.

In fact, at first (11:24 AM) you were claiming that Walker never even mentioned the National Guard. ("100% pure bullshit" means that there is nothing true about the statement at all.)

When it was pointed out that Walker did indeed threaten to use the National Guard while announcing his Budget Repair Bill, you replied (12:42 PM) that it was said in the press conference that the NG were to be used "specifically to man prisons".

At 1:05 PM you stated that Walker made it "known immediately" that the NG were to be used for prisons and I was full of shit for saying otherwise.

This is is the first time you have said it was "later in the day", which is exactly what I've been saying since 1:25 PM.

It is all right here in this thread, for people to see, so I don't know who you think you're kiddin'...

In fact, at first (11:24 AM) you were claiming that Walker never even mentioned the National Guard. ("100% pure bullshit" means that there is nothing true about the statement at all.)"

Only by your dishonest measure penguin, about what I expect from a you. Her comment was 100% pure bullshit, because Walker did not threaten anyone. To carry your logic further if I said 'Purple Penquin urinated in a public place in front of children today, Monday, April 2nd that wouldn't be 100% false because it actually is Monday, April 2nd.

"purplepenquin said...When it was pointed out that Walker did indeed threaten to use the National Guard while announcing his Budget Repair Bill, you replied (12:42 PM) that it was said in the press conference that the NG were to be used "specifically to man prisons".

This is also a lie. I never said he made the statement at his press conference, only that "It was known". And as I have shown from multiple press reports on the day of his announcement it was in fact known. It wasn't "a few days later" like you claimed. It was that day. And it was widely reported by everyone. Except lefty blogs and assholes like Scot Ross of One Wisconsin Now who said "No Wisconsin Governor has deployed the military against public employees as far back as the 1930s, showing just how radical the steps are that Gov. Walker is taking to consolidate his power," days later.

""purplepenquin said...You stated that Walker made it "known immediately" that the NG were to be used for prisons and I was full of shit for saying otherwise.

This is is the first time you have said it was "later in the day", which is exactly what I've been saying since 1:25 PM.

It is all right here in this thread, for people to see, so I don't know who you think you're kiddin'..."

You quote me saying "later in the day" but I never used that description. So another lie. I said "the same day".

And you didn't say later in the day, you said "a few days later".

You are a habitual liar. With a side order of paranoia. The only truthful thing you said was "It is all right here in this thread, for people to see".

"roesch/voltaire said...Old dead eyes knows the language the will gather more money form his supporters in Texas, but not Wisconsin as many of those minions are our neighbors who patrol our streets and put out our fires, and teach in one of the highest ranked public school systems in the country."

I wonder if you wish that you had found out that both the Milwaukee Police Association and the Milwaukee Professional Firefighters Association both endorsed Walker today.

Probably not.

And BTW, MPS, the largest school district in the state, is a shithole. It is a shithole among shitholes nationally.

"100%"...You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. 'cause the only word in her statement that you are actually calling into question is "threatened".

Seriously...the way you phrased your response ("100 pure bullshit") followed by the other guy who said her statement was a fabrication, lead me to honestly beleive that ya'll really-truly thought Walker said nothing-at-all about the National Guard.

Even now you can't produce a statement from him at the press conference where he specifically says the NG would be used to staff prisons, but instead you're claiming it was just "known" by everyone (before the press conference?) and anyone who says that the Gov didn't immediately say that at the time is "full of shit".

You're all over the place on this one, constantly changing your statements and totally making it up as ya go. I really can't beleive that you're planting your flag on this one, when your contridictions are right there for everyone to see.

All that aside, were you or weren't saying that the National Guard should have been used to get the protesters out of the Capitol? I know how sensitive you are about getting mistaken for other people, so I am sincerely asking you to clear that up...

"I wonder if you wish that you had found out that both the Milwaukee Police Association and the Milwaukee Professional Firefighters Association both endorsed Walker today."

Interesting, that, but not surprising. They did the same in the general election.

What I find interesting is that it occurred (presuming that it's true) the first business day after the federal district court judge decided the union lawsuit against Walker. The unions won certain rights back because the State Patrol's union, which had endorsed Walker, was treated differently than all other state unions by retaining those same rights.

Now here's what I found curious, George, in Act 10 (also known as the "Budget Repair Bill")--all union rights were also retained for municipal police and firefighters. What has that got to do with the state budget?

So, you had one class of employees, the State Patrol, who were treated differently and had also endorsed Walker, and municipal police and firefighters who were also treated differently, and had also endorsed Walker.

Curiouser and curiouser.

I say that the "municipal" employees endorsed Walker because Milwaukee is far and away the state's largest city, and so their police and firefighter union membership is far larger than any other municipality's. They are the significant "municipal" union membership.

It's all just politics. Nothing to be surprised at. Just--interesting.